Originally Posted By: Bill S.

Quote:
Is one capable of seeing what they choose to see


If your earlier comments about Rev have any relevance, the answer would seem to be “yes”.

The answer is yes and it can be qualified with the reality that capability does not necessarily produce quality. Tho a child can walk it will need to master that capability before he/she can run with balance and sure footed steps.
Originally Posted By: Bill S.

BTW, in the above quote, your use of grammatical number is interesting; does it reflect your personal belief about the integration of the individual with the “whole”?
Beliefs are irrelevant to the reality of the ONE. The infinite consciousness is not so much fragmented as individuality chooses to see it fragmented, with varying degrees of wholeness based on what is needed to fill the gaps, where the belief in gaps exist.
Originally Posted By: Bill S.

Quote:
is what one sees inclusive to the experience of the potential within all that is, or exclusive to personal belief?


If personal belief is to be divorced from the “experience of the potential within”, then you have answered your own question about the individual’s potential for selective observation.

yes. To implement the connection where belief is primary in ones system of perception. However if one has risen above beliefs to engage the subtle senses, the nature of the universe is fully integrated as ones self, and knowledge will supersede belief.
Originally Posted By: Bill S.

Quote:
If one can choose, is choice limited or infinite in possibility?


Any limitation would necessarily be imposed by our 4-dimensional perception of reality. A lot depends on whether or not you regard the scope of choice as realisable within our finite perception or as a potential that might require some preternatural support for its realisation.

You believe the human nervous system is finite in its capabilities? To what extent?
Originally Posted By: Bill S.

Quote:
Can one know God or simply see what they want to see, and if one can know God could they recognize when someone is simply following a belief or immersed in a constant that is beyond individual belief but also within the belief system?


Any attempt to answer this question without first undertaking a rigorous definition of the terms used would simply be to walk into potential mire of convoluted word games. For example, you would need to define:
a. God
b. knowledge of God

No. when one knows the indefinable there is resonance. It is not the words or the definition that is recognized. Because the indefinable is not a thing or a definition.
Originally Posted By: Bill S.
you would need to define:
c. belief, as distinct from knowledge

That can be pointed towards and validated in ones own experience, such as the experience of the infinite which hasn't the need for belief to exist, tho one must let go of belief about it to experience it since it exceeds belief, or cannot be bound by belief.
Originally Posted By: Bill S.

d. what you mean by “a constant that is beyond individual belief”
e. how something “that is beyond individual belief” can be “within the belief system”.

The infinite exists throughout the course of time where beliefs about it come and go and never capture it. So it lives within the belief system as the belief system is a reflection of potential. That reflection however can never capture or define potential.

It is belief that pushes one toward opening doors of perception but belief has to be dropped to go thru the door and to perceive.

I was addicted to the Hokey Pokey, but then I turned myself around!!